MSM Pressuring Nate Silver to "Wait for More Data". Nate: Call It As You See It

[berni_mccoy]

Love this!

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/10/sept-9-call-it-as-you-see-it/

I’ve been picking up some sentiment from analysts and journalists in my Twitter feed recently, who correctly note that polling around the party conventions can be volatile. They suggest that we ought to wait for more data before concluding very much about the bounces that the conventions have produced.

I’d love to have more data. I’d love it if we had a dozen national tracking polls rather than four. I’d love it if we had a pollster who was spending tens of thousands of dollars to poll every single swing state every single day.

It’s also the case that we’ll know more about the state of the race in two weeks than we know now — and we’ll know more about in four weeks than we do in two.

But we publish our forecasts every day. The goal is to make what we hope is the most accurate possible forecast given the information available at that time.

Saying “wait for more data” sort of misses the point. What about the data that we have on hand already? Is it compelling enough to suggest that there has been some change in condition of the race? Or isn’t it?

I suspect the MSM doesn't like the truth being told. They'd much rather prefer a close horse race right up to election morning in order to keep ratings high. Personally, it doesn't bother me that they do that as it keeps the electoral engaged and energized. It's actually in the Democrats favor to keep the electorate engaged this way as it won't lead to complacency among voters and Democrats do better with higher turnout. Even so, I think it is completely wrong for them to recommend anyone with such a high standard as Nate to "wait" to publish his model's results.

[ananda]

1. LOL

Put that in your smipe and poke it, MSM!

[get the red out]

2. STFU!

That's what they really mean. It's his web site and none of their stinking, horse-race promoting business.

Actually, this might be a horse-race, it's just that Mitt is starting to look like a mule.

[JRLeft]

3. We want our horse race. Please shut up.

[BlueStreak]

14. It isn't just because they enjoy the race. It is mainly about advertising.

The two things media companies live for are the Olympics and the political campaigns. And only one network gets the Olympics (the advertising rates go way up during the Olympics). But all networks can get in on the ad spend during the campaigns.

THEY WANT THESE ADS TO KEEP RUNNING FULL FORCE RIGHT UP TO ELECTION DAY.

That is what is going on here, plain and simple, and we ought to be calling them out on that.

[unc70]

33. Also why fund raising defines viable candidates

The Obama campaign in 2008 was possibly the largest voluntary transfer of money from individuals to a few of the largest corporations ever in history.

[sufrommich]

4. The media needs a horse race . They did the same thing

in 2008,made it seem as if McCain was right on Obama's tail and that it was a close race.About 2 seconds after Obama won,all the talking heads on TV turned from "this is close,folks" to "well, of course he won,McCain lost long ago".

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

23. AsI recall, there were a lot of glum looking TV spokesmodels

that had a sad sine the race was over so quickly.

[CoffeeCat]

5. The MSM meme is that this is a horse race...

I suspect nefarious reasons for this.

I think the Republicans plan to engage in a great deal of voter suppression and vote stealing. Remember all of those voters who saw -- with their own eyes -- their vote being counted as for Bush, when they really voted for Kerry. You only need to do that to 2 percent of the Democratic votes, in some swing states, and you've got yourself a fake win.

Look at all of the blatant suppression efforts--such as Ohio and voter ID bullshit in swing states.

They want the polls close, so the odd results aren't questioned.

I am so glad that, despite most of the MSM falling in lockstep with this unpatriotic bullshit--that there are people out there like Nate Silver, who won't play.

It gives me hope!

[djean111]

7. EXACTLY what I think.

I believe they are laying the groundwork for an unquestioned Romney "win" engineered by fucking around with the actual voting.

[JoePhilly]

10. You also don't need 100s of 24/7 pundits if its not close ... the only jobs the pundits care about

are their own.

[Skidmore]

18. They want to collect the maximum amount of advertising dollars possible from

both parties. A horse race assures that.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

21. Too bad this race is like Secretariat versus the donkey from Shrek

....and the donkey in this scenario is not the Democrat!

[Kurovski]

31. +1. I posted similarly below.

Keep the suspicion of theft low by keeping the numbers close

[fugop]

6. Much like the "instapoll" disaster for pundits

Remember how the pundits kept telling us in debates that they were tied or that the GOP candidate clearly won? And then remember how they bitched and moaned that it didn't make sense that the instapolls came in showing the opposite?

They couldn't keep up their lies in the face of such events. I keep wondering if they're going to drop the instapolls this year and go back to Luntz-type focus groups of "random undecided voters," which is easier to rig.

Anyway, they're trying to do the same to Nate. How can they go about their business of gleefully trashing Obama's chances, which they usually do by trumpeting a right-leaning poll, when Nate is compiling several and pointing out the trends? Answer: They can't ... so they try to shut him up. I hope he continues his pushback here.

[JoePhilly]

8. It's NECK and NECK ... and you're ruining it!!!!

[leveymg]

9. I hope most of the MSM pundits & pollsters lose their jobs along with the GOP. Both discredited and

irrelevant. Unable to deliver the goods and the viewers. Hit the road, Jack.

[JoePhilly]

11. That's part of why they push the "its close" meme ... you don't need so many pundits

if its a blowout.

[leveymg]

13. Also, a lot of the uncommitted vote just goes for whomever they think will win, anyway.

Double-whammy. I hope this election breaks the back of the RW media and political organizations.

[JoePhilly]

17. agree...nt

[bigtree]

12. momentum is the most interesting indicator from polls

. . . can't show that without a progression of a variety of them.

[Blue Yorker]

15. The Colorado super-professors: Did they wait for data?

The MSM went gaga over some Colorado professors who predicted (weeks ago) that Romney will win. In this case, data wasn't necessary. Hypocrites.

[freshwest]

22. +1

[flamingdem]

16. What about the idea that the GOP wants some hope? What about that pressure?

If their base loses interest maybe we'll keep congress...

They don't want to take the pressure off.

[JBoy]

19. LOL. Yup, because the media always waits for all the data:

[iandhr]

20. There is one thing and one thing only the media cares about.

Ratings.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

24. Bing and Go.

You may pass GO and collect $200.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. There is an upside to being a horse race though

people do not think they can skip it. So the media is not doing any good to their candidate.

And a bounce, you mean there WAS a bounce? You kid me right? Some of us even called it.

[malaise]

26. M$M wants the money

and if the race is over they lose out on that lovely advertising cash.

[DallasNE]

27. Crowd Size Is A Good Indicator Of Support

After all, nobody forces people to show up. And the Republicans currently have a huge crowd size deficit. Also, just look at the much higher enthusiasm witnessed at the DNC convention than at the RNC convention. MSM seems to completely ignore these telling aspects of the race -- probably because it doesn't serve their horse race mantra.

[Hamlette]

28. I don't think it is advertizing dollars for a couple of reasons, well maybe three

1. This year it seems there is unlimited cash. If the Romney is behind I suspect his wealthy donor will just give more money.

2. Even if the presidential race seems won so that wealthy donor don't want to spend money, I suspect they will just give the money down ticket in an effort to keep the house which is competitive.

3. TV stations/networks have to give candidates the lowest price they charge all others for the ads. I don't know exactly how this works, for instance, do they have to give Obama the same rate they charge for an ad at 3 in the morning? And I don't know if it applies to Rove and his type of group, I suspect it doesn't but I don't know. Either way, ad to that the fact that the station/network can only run so many ads per hour and it might not be the golden cow it appears.

I think it is pundits and 24 hour cable news that drive the horse race. They have to have something to talk about. There is no "local" race for them to talk about. When you broadcast nationwide, you can't keep your audience talking about Senate or House races. So, you have to discuss the presidential race and if it is already won, who will watch?

[Kurovski]

29. Also never forget that keeping polls close also keeps elections close enough to STEAL.

Who would believe that say, a senate seat was lost by someone who had a 12 point lead over the opponent a day before an election?

the polls have been diddled for a minimum of 15 years.

[rocktivity]

30. Well, isn't that special!

Why haven't these "analysts and journalists" been asking Nate to "wait for data" BEFORE now -- because Romney at least appeared to be putting up a fight? And how much longer should we wait for data -- until the first week of November, perhaps?


rocktivity

[JohnnyRingo]

32. Nobody wants to call a landslide... ever.

The media has obvious reasons to predict a close race, but neither campaign will call the election in their favor either. Doing so can cause voter apathy as some people won't get up and vote if they think their candidate already has it in the bag.

I only hope Silver is right.